Dr Sean C. McConnell provides an introduction to gene editing, and Scott J. Schweikart discusses what prudent governance requires.

This month, AMA Journal of Ethics theme editor Jacquelyn Nestor, a fifth-year MD/PhD student at Hofstra-Northwell School of Medicine, interviewed Allen Buchanan, PhD, about how we can safely explore cutting-edge biomedical enhancements.

Gene editing to enhance humans’ adaptability to climate change should consider safety, harm to be averted, succeeding generations, and social consequences.

Noninvasive prenatal testing arguably constitutes a form of eugenics in a social context in which certain reproductive outcomes are not valued.

A philosophy professor argues that prenatal genetic testing allows potentially painful afflictions to be discovered prior to birth and does not unjustly discriminate against disabled people.

Two bioethicists argue that prenatal disability screening promotes negativity toward the disabled and gives parents the ability to selectively form families.

Decisions about whether to pursue IVF for savior siblings are difficult to make when probable success rates differ by clinic and evidence is lacking.

Chromosomal microarray analysis reveals many gene variants of unknown significance. The uncertainty about these variants—might they be deleterious or are they benign?—complicates genetic counseling.

Today, much of the information that doctors gain during medical school and residency can be accessed by patients at the click of a mouse.

A case study of shared decision making guided by the patient values.